Another new Brexit thread

[mancity2012_eamo]

Not only that but it's completely inaccurate. The Scots don't drink whiskey.

Tru.

 

[west didsblue]

Not only that but it's completely inaccurate. The Scots don't drink whiskey.

Not true. They don't manufacture whiskey but the ones I've met will drink anything.

 

[mancity2012_eamo]

you noticed the Irish spelling?

It has been noticed.

 

[BobKowalski]

You are obviously under estimating the possibility of crashing out at the end of 2020 which some punters think is the ERG's plan all along!

I’ve largely dismissed it to be honest. If we wanted no deal far easier to - just well not do a deal with the EU. If the Benn Act was triggered, force the election, fight it on no deal and if won crash out end of January.

Every time a PM peers into the no deal abyss they become determined to leave with a deal. ERG Tories may want no deal, may even think they can get it but in reality no I don’t think it’s happening or ever likely too.

Like all those prepare for Brexit ads it was all get this form, get that form, make sure you get full travel and health insurance. Seriously they weren’t exactly selling no deal or even Brexit with that campaign.

 

[Gareth Barry Conlon]

I totally agree that the public should of been consulted on the type of deal because that would account for the kind of Brexit leavers and remainers wanted too. Unfortunately that didn't happen and I have no good words about how May handled her years in charge.

The only way out of this for me is a general election with all options on the table and that includes no deal. We then know where everyone stands and the people can finally have their say without any future vote rigging as is the plan currently by Parliamentary remainers.

If a second referendum with remain on it is voted for by GE then fair enough, I will cast my vote for remain because that is what I wanted 3 years ago. I however lost and that is why until then I will defend the option that gives what 'most' people wanted.

However, when it comes to a GE and not a referendum - I won't vote for Labour or the Lib Dems on the pure hypocrisy that they will offer a second referendum on the basis that they just assume we would vote to remain.

This is the arrogance people cannot stand. What happens if Labour get in and the second referendum results in the public opting for a deal that Labour as the governing party rejects!?! It's an utterly ridiculous position.

And as for the Lib Dems well they plan to circumvent everything altogether which would essentially destroy voting confidence for a large number for decades.

What you are describing is basically what Cameron did. He offered a false choice as he had no intention of ever delivering brexit. He should have defined the specific type of deal he could have lived with and given that option and remain to the people. He basically left the leave option totally undefined and that opened the door for the biggest political BS campaign in our countries history. BS won and BS politicians are now in power, still BSing the people about what is going on.

It will take years to get out of this mess whichever way we go. My preferred route is to call out the BS and get back to reality and that involves remaining in the EU however we get there, I will take the bleating of leavers as a result. If we leave we will get years and years more BS and the eventual blame game we are all preparing for when the economy goes to shit and the unicorns fail to appear.

 

[George Hannah]

I did.

I heard did hear whispers of kilt lifting accommodations upon the cold marble table tops at Sinclairs but never realised....

 

[Chippy_boy]

I disagree there, personally. He is hell bent on whatever the flavour of the month is. When it is no deal, he will push that as hard as he pushed what he hinself said no PM would ever accept.

That's an illogical piece of analysis IMO.

If he is the egotist only out for himself, as you imply, then the last thing he would want would be to be kicked out prematurely and to be remembered as the guy who ruined the UK. Why on earth would he want that? And if he is not then he wouldn't want no deal either.

You may not like the guy nor what he stands for, but there isn't a conspiracy theory behind everything. Sometimes what appears to be true is actually true.

 

[Bluemanc100]

What you are describing is basically what Cameron did. He offered a false choice as he had no intention of ever delivering brexit. He should have defined the specific type of deal he could have lived with and given that option and remain to the people. He basically left the leave option totally undefined and that opened the door for the biggest political BS campaign in our countries history. BS won and BS politicians are now in power, still BSing the people about what is going on.

It will take years to get out of this mess whichever way we go. My preferred route is to call out the BS and get back to reality and that involves remaining in the EU however we get there, I will take the bleating of leavers as a result. If we leave we will get years and years more BS and the eventual blame game we are all preparing for when the economy goes to shit and the unicorns fail to appear.

Your preferred route means the end of democracy as we know it... you surely don’t want that

 

[Ban-jani]

In your first point is one of the many fallacies Brexit sadly that was played upon by Vote Leave, Farage and the government with their targets on net migration targets etc. The problem with this type of racism its ingrained and you can't just put the genie back in once the bottle has been opened. Then you have to consider the fact that Cameron had been trying to get concessions from the EU which he had failed quite badly with it was quite hard for him to campaign for something he had grievances with.

The speed of the debate raised more questions from all MP's from all stripes than it resolved. It made no sense to do this when an extension was on its way

I’ve said on here before and don’t wish to bang on about it but I’m reading Broken Vows, a critique of Blair and his government. What is startling is New Labour’s almost obsessive refusal to acknowledge immigration as needing to be curbed at all. It was a dirty word in the Cabinet and the flood gates were definitely opened, even allowing people to claim refugee status coming from places that had no danger nor warranted fleeing.

I love a lot about that government and their achievements when it comes to living standards but this definitely contributed to where we are now, I’ve realised this now.

 

[lust overlord]

That's an illogical piece of analysis IMO.

If he is the egotist only out for himself, as you imply, then the last thing he would want would be to be kicked out prematurely and to be remembered as the guy who ruined the UK. Why on earth would he want that? And if he is not then he wouldn't want no deal either.

You may not like the guy nor what he stands for, but there isn't a conspiracy theory behind everything. Sometimes what appears to be true is actually true.

In a field of liars he stands supreme.
Conspiracy theories or coincidence theories aside,how he's managed to become prime minister is head scratching.

 

[Chippy_boy]

In a field of liars he stands supreme.
Conspiracy theories or coincidence theories aside,how he's managed to become prime minister is head scratching.

You don't have to scratch for more than 5 seconds. He's quite clever, and is politically astute. Job done.

 

[Chippy_boy]

I’ve said on here before and don’t wish to bang on about it but I’m reading Broken Vows, a critique of Blair and his government. What is startling is New Labour’s almost obsessive refusal to acknowledge immigration as needing to be curbed at all. It was a dirty word in the Cabinet and the flood gates were definitely opened, even allowing people to claim refugee status coming from places that had no danger nor warranted fleeing.

I love a lot about that government and their achievements when it comes to living standards but this definitely contributed to where we are now, I’ve realised this now.

For me, huge fan of Thatcher though I am, I recognise that she was not without her flaws or misjudgements.

She is very largely responsible for the huge enlargement of the EU from a relatively small group of broadly economically aligned major western Europe economies, UK, France, Germany, Holland, Belgium, Spain, Italy etc. to the 28 we have now. I think what drove her to push for this was an attempt to maintain a purpose for the EU of being a free trade area and little more. It was thinkable to imagine full economic and political convergence of a small group of countries already fairly closely aligned, but unthinkable that such a direction of travel could apply to a mish-mash of 28 completely misaligned nations. So by widening the EU out as far as possible, she sought (again IMO) to keep it as a free trade zone and nothing further.

She won the battle, but lost the war. Had we stuck with the original handful, we would not have the swathes of migrants flocking in from countries where £7 an hour is a bloody fortune and where the unemployment rates are multiples of what they are in the UK.

 

[yerwot?]

The "real" brexit with the real risks to the public well being in the headlines, instead of being scornfully dismissed as project fear by the msm, would likely produce a different result. Therefore the message is now just get it done, everyone just wants it put behind so we can carry on( with austerity) but post-brexit will make today look like the good old days. The glib phrase "leave and re-apply", is easy to counter, "we remain and brexit concoct a plan that could fly", not "we won you lost" or the leave or else threat that is appearing more and more in the brixit war-cries. Turbulence ahead, the storm is too big to avoid the navigator only knows "Turn right Turn right" the seat belt sign has fused and the passengers have just realised only the cabin crew have parachutes...

 

[Ban-jani]

This is where we are now and why I wish to get passed this stinking phase of British politics-

Labour MP Lisa Nandy was sent a torrent of vile abuse after backing Boris Johnson's Brexit bill on its second reading.

Ms Nandy, who has represented Wigan since 2010, supported the bill and had argued for others to do the same.

In the Commons, she voiced her opinion that the deal must be allowed to "proceed to committee stage" to allow it to be scrutinised further, stating a will to improve it and insisted her support was not guaranteed at a third reading.

Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn told her he understood the concerns of MPs such as her, from Leave backing communities, though still urged her to vote against it.

However, she has been blasted over email after following through on her stance, branded "total scum" and "despicable".

She shared too screengrabs of messages on her Twitter, with the caption: "Morning!"

One message said: "You should have your fat a*** kicked out of the party. I don't know how anyone could walk past you without holding their nose. I hope you rot in hell."

 

[lust overlord]

You don't have to scratch for more than 5 seconds. He's quite clever, and is politically astute. Job done.

Head scratching because of his track record of betrayal,gaffes,proven untruths,the list can go on

Politically astute though, I'll grant that.

Wouldn't trust the guy with a pair of scissors.

 

[inbetween]

What you are describing is basically what Cameron did. He offered a false choice as he had no intention of ever delivering brexit. He should have defined the specific type of deal he could have lived with and given that option and remain to the people. He basically left the leave option totally undefined and that opened the door for the biggest political BS campaign in our countries history. BS won and BS politicians are now in power, still BSing the people about what is going on.

It will take years to get out of this mess whichever way we go. My preferred route is to call out the BS and get back to reality and that involves remaining in the EU however we get there, I will take the bleating of leavers as a result. If we leave we will get years and years more BS and the eventual blame game we are all preparing for when the economy goes to shit and the unicorns fail to appear.

How could Cameron predefine anything?

The EU refused to enter into any negotiations or talk of deals until we triggered Article 50. So how could he prescribe a Brexit for the referendum?

The only thing Cameron could of done was work within the bounds of the EU to change things but the things he wanted could not be achieved.

The EU Parliament was another avenue for change but good luck getting anything past the German dominated social democrat group of MEP's that reign supreme in the EU Parliament.

 

[BobKowalski]

Your preferred route means the end of democracy as we know it... you surely don’t want that

Democracy will survive. Maybe we can use it as a teaching moment. Next time we vote for something make sure we have all the info to hand otherwise we might do something stupid. Again.

 

[Gabriel]

I’ve said on here before and don’t wish to bang on about it but I’m reading Broken Vows, a critique of Blair and his government. What is startling is New Labour’s almost obsessive refusal to acknowledge immigration as needing to be curbed at all. It was a dirty word in the Cabinet and the flood gates were definitely opened, even allowing people to claim refugee status coming from places that had no danger nor warranted fleeing.

I love a lot about that government and their achievements when it comes to living standards but this definitely contributed to where we are now, I’ve realised this now.

But wasn't attracting so many immigrants to come and work in the UK a major contributing factor in driving the booming economy at that time? It wasn't such a problem in the good times, just that nobody thought the good times would end and nobody thought the migrants would remain. Conversely, the main European economies were lagging behind and their powerful Trade Unions opposed free movement. Would be fascinating in the future to see a longitudinal comparison of Ireland, Sweden, and the UK to see whether and how that decision changed their countries.

 

[Ban-jani]

For me, huge fan of Thatcher though I am, I recognise that she was not without her flaws or misjudgements.

She is very largely responsible for the huge enlargement of the EU from a relatively small group of broadly economically aligned major western Europe economies, UK, France, Germany, Holland, Belgium, Spain, Italy etc. to the 28 we have now. I think what drove her to push for this was an attempt to maintain a purpose for the EU of being a free trade area and little more. It was thinkable to imagine full economic and political convergence of a small group of countries already fairly closely aligned, but unthinkable that such a direction of travel could apply to a mish-mash of 28 completely misaligned nations. So by widening the EU out as far as possible, she sought (again IMO) to keep it as a free trade zone and nothing further.

She won the battle, but lost the war. Had we stuck with the original handful, we would not have the swathes of migrants flocking in from countries where £7 an hour is a bloody fortune and where the unemployment rates are multiples of what they are in the UK.

There’s probably dozens of different paths in which this country and the EU could have taken, that would have not resulted in Brexit to be fair. I don’t think leave will/would ever get over 52%, the environment and the situation we found ourselves in benefitted the argument to leave perfectly.

On Thatcher, I deeply respect her, probably more so than any leader I’ve had so many disagreements with.

 

[Ban-jani]

But wasn't attracting so many immigrants to come and work in the UK a major contributing factor in driving the booming economy at that time? It wasn't such a problem in the good times, just that nobody thought the good times would end and nobody thought the migrants would remain. Conversely, the main European economies were lagging behind and their powerful Trade Unions opposed free movement. Would be fascinating in the future to see a longitudinal comparison of Ireland, Sweden, and the UK to see whether and how that decision changed their countries.

Immigration certainly added to the booming economy but the decision to impose as little barriers as they could possibly get away with was incredibly shortsighted and even New Labour’s leadership realised it eventually.